"The Creation Story!"

Quote:

How do you know that the world wasn't created by God about half an hour ago and all the fossils and written records,including this,and our memories and everything else created with it?God can do anything I've been told.What He is supposed to have created out of nothing in 4004 BC(?) was a pretty complex outfit and no mistake.If He could do that doing the other would hardly have taxed his powers.

Because that's dogma. There is basically no good evidence for the Young Earth bullshitters and basically all evidence against them. You gotta love science; it strives to find the truth instead of just applying useless dogma.

0 Replies

spendius wrote:

How do you know that the world wasn't created by God about half an hour ago and all the fossils and written records, including this,and our memories and everything else created with it ?

Obviously an omnipotent, omniscient being could do anything, and there would be no way for us to see through it's illusion if it didn't want us to. So this scenario is certainly a possibility, even though it's not a "scientific" possibility (because it involves the supernatural).

But what of it?

What if a supernatural entity really *did* create all of reality a few moments ago, and gifted us with all the memories and clues to support a deep history of causality. If the illusion was completely perfect, then how would it be any different from reality (at least to us)? My point is that using this argument really just brings you back full circle, because the illusion is identical to reality, and therefor *is* reality for all intents and purposes.

0 Replies

What if some people can conceptualize everything but a real God to whom humans trying to analyze his purposes makes as much sense as an ant trying to be an art critic by crawling around on an intricate sculpture?

0 Replies

spendius wrote:

How do you know that the world wasn't created by God about half an hour ago

We don't. Likewise I don't know that I'm not the only person that exists and you're all hallucinations that I've dreamed up. While these ideas may be fun to ponder they get us nowhere.

In order to operate within this universe we have to make a few assumptions. One of which is that the universe exists and is at least roughly what it appears to be. No chain of logic can exist without a base of assumptions (axioms). It is the aim of science to bring these down to as small and as basic a level as is possible. For example bertrand russel achieved fame partly for being able to reduce the number of axioms necessary for maths to work from 5 to 4.

Religion tends to simply invent new ones any time it needs to explain an error.

0 Replies

Quote:

Religion tends to simply invent new ones any time it needs to explain an error.

As do sometimes politicians, scientists, and wannabe scientists.

0 Replies

in reply to the original posting, im just to lazy to read the whole thing. Isnt the catholic church against insest, also if they are so against it, why did they not specifically mention that he did do this and support reasons why this is an "exception" to the rules set forth by your so called god. Unless you are correct and their were other people alive at that time but then again this would be going against the bible, because adam and eve were suppose to be the only ones alive? Were they not? Now i have not read the bible so im not sure if they do mention any exceptions so i could be wrong on that part, but otherwise if they dont mention anything isnt this intresting how its one huge revolving circle?

I have often thought since i was in grade school that other people were all illusions or that I was really the only one put on earth, Ive pretty much forgotten about that, but it has helped me to live a little and express my opinion much more clearly.

0 Replies

If Adam and Eve were 'one of a kind' at Creation, then there are numerous problems with the Creation story not the least of which is the problem of where Cain found a wife. If, however, as most Bible scholars believe, Adam and Eve are symbolic of humans created in God's image, then we have no problem whatsoever with there being many of that species and it also eliminates any conflict with Darwin.

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

If Adam and Eve were 'one of a kind' at Creation, then there are numerous problems with the Creation story not the least of which is the problem of where Cain found a wife.

Probably just married a sister. The bible wouldn't bother mentioning her birth, she's female Wink

Quote:

If, however, as most Bible scholars believe, Adam and Eve are symbolic of humans created in God's image, then we have no problem whatsoever with there being many of that species and it also eliminates any conflict with Darwin.

Don't you love how christians claim "oh yeah, that's just a metaphor" when disregarding it as fact makes many of their rituals pointless. E.g. marriage and baptism are both derived from the literal fact of adam and eve/original sin.

0 Replies

Antibudda, Re your post of Feb 06

"The objects in the sky all "appear" to be moving away from a central point. This does not mean that they actually are. It means that they APPEAR to be and that is as far as our observations can take us.

That is my point. Any one that is seriously confused between observable facts and hypothesized theories, is religious.

Some of our "Big Bangers" are at least as confused as my local snake handling preacher.

Simply because a rainbow can be seen does not mean that one actually exists. One only exists as an illusion due to the refractory properties of light. So does a rainbow actually exist? Only in our minds, unfortunetly.

I have some reasons to "believe" Very Happy

that the observed "red shift" also exists only as a property of light with its interactions of mass and time or distance.

0 Replies

Ray, Re your post of Feb 07,

I noted that you assumed a "Big Bang" as an established fact. It is not. It is only a part of the Big Bang--Expanding Universe Theory.

In order to believe in the BB-EU you must make several assumptions regarding space, time and distance.

In order to believe in "The Creation" you must make several assumptions regarding Supernatural Intelligences, human perfidy, and linguistic abilities of serpents.

Without those assumptions, that cannot be shown to have ever happened, neither theory will work. Sad

(As a Mechanic I have to make things work, here in this Universe with all its limitations) Very Happy

0 Replies

DTOM Wrote

Quote:

Don't you love how christians claim "oh yeah, that's just a metaphor" when disregarding it as fact makes many of their rituals pointless. E.g. marriage and baptism are both derived from the literal fact of adam and eve/original sin.

Most Christians don't see it that way at all. Adam and Eve can easily be a metaphor as an explanation of how sin got into the world. But whatever form Adam and Eve did or did not take, or whether they are historical beings or metaphor, does not in any way change the fact that sin is in the world and all have fallen short and thus have need of salvation in order to be who and what God intended.

From the first to the last, the Bible repeats a theme of Creation (new starts), Sin (doing that which is harmful to oneself or others), Judgment (consequence for one's sins), and redemption (rescue from the consequences and set out to march on again.) There are innumerable ways in which all this is accomplished woven through the stories and historical accounts. Adam and Eve were just a 'beginning' but certainly are only a tiny part of the whole story.

0 Replies

Foxfyre,

I'm with you on that. Some of the Bible is great literature. Simply because it is fantastic does not detract from my enjoyment of it.

I also enjoy a good romance occasionally, along with some Isacc Asimov and Alan M. Dershowitz.

But the best, IMO natch, Is "The Song of Soloman". It's so upbeat Exclamation

Beats hell out of talking to snakes Very Happy

0 Replies

And even saves you cost of a Playboy subscription. Smile

0 Replies

What about the passages about killing people who works on sundays or condemning idolators?

0 Replies

Dogma.

0 Replies

The wages of sin are death. That was the sum of the message of Adam and Eve. This is stated in many ways in many different forums in many different circumstances and for many different reasons in the Bible. You have to read it through the eyes of those who wrote it to fully understand it. I always advise to not attempt to assign modern morality to ancient peoples. If we didn't evolve and get better, it would prove Darwin wrong now wouldn't it?

0 Replies

Fox,

I have also noted that the wages of virtue are also death. Am I the only one to notice that Question

Seems strange. I am not that bright :wink:

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

If we didn't evolve and get better, it would prove Darwin wrong now wouldn't it?

No.

Quote:

Some of the Bible is great literature.

The ending was a bit too deus ex machina for me. Actually in all seriousness I don't think it is good literature and that isn't just religious sensibilities. I think the hindu holy stories (forgive me hindus, mental blank, can't remember the name) are good literature. I actually find the bible very badly written. I'm sorry christians/bibliophiles but that's just my own artistic opinion, if you personally enjoy reading it then I have no intent of discouraging it.

Quote:

Most Christians don't see it that way at all.

Of course they don't. That's my point. Sheesh.

Quote:

whether they are historical beings or metaphor,

Next thing you'll be saying God is a metaphor but that doesn't mean we should stop worshipping him. <sigh> this is the thing that annoys me about christians. The book is presented as historical fact and yet when these historical facts are disproven christians just say it's a metaphor even though it's pretty damn clear that for the last four thousand years it has been considered historical even (and especially) by the authors.

Then christians who accept these things never pause to consider that half the elements of their religion don't apply any more if they're metaphorical rather than historical. For example, if moses isn't historical and neither are the ten commandments he brought down from the mountain then these ten commandments weren't from God.

0 Replies

Foxfyre, if we do not get better in a thousand years, it does not prove evolution wrong, it would only prove Darwin's personal view wrong. Evolution is a process that does not always result in species getting better (although whether it is guided or not is up for metaphysical debate), and I would not be surprised if we don't change much over the next thousand years given that we have technology and science to aid us.

0 Replies

Well we're talking several thousand years from the stories of the ancient Hebrew in the Old Testament to modern times. Darwins whole theory, however, was that all living things evolve as they must to conform to changing nvironment/situations/ whatever as is necessary to survive. Those with the capability to survive (the strongest) do so and the rest do not survive and become extinct.

If Darwin is right, there is no reason to believe that humankind, the most intelligent of all species, has not also adapted and conformed and changed with new information, new incentives, new conditions, etc. I know natural evolution takes a long time. Intellectual and spiritual evolution works on the same principles, however, and can move much more quickly.

Will humankind be much different in a thousand years than it is now? That's hard to say. We have drastically and dramatically altered our culture and lifestyles in the last 50 years. I personally think the next 50 will be even more dramatic.

0 Replies

"The Creation Story!"

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know